Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:We aimed to compare the outcome of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients who received endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) with confirmed COVID-19 to those without. METHODS:We performed a retrospective analysis using the Vizient Clinical Data Base and included hospital discharges from April 1 to July 31 2020 with ICD-10 codes for AIS and EVT. The primary outcome was in-hospital death and the secondary outcome was favorable discharge, defined as discharge home or to acute rehabilitation. We compared patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 to those without. As a sensitivity analysis, we compared COVID-19 AIS patients who did not undergo EVT to those who did, to balance potential adverse events inherent to COVID-19 infection. RESULTS:We identified 3165 AIS patients who received EVT during April to July 2020, in which COVID-19 was confirmed in 104 (3.3%). Comorbid COVID-19 infection was associated with younger age, male sex, diabetes, black race, Hispanic ethnicity, intubation, acute coronary syndrome, acute renal failure, and longer hospital and intensive care unit length of stay. The rate of in-hospital death was 12.4% without COVID-19 vs 29.8% with COVID-19 (P<0.001). In mixed-effects logistic regression that accounted for patient clustering by hospital, comorbid COVID-19 increased the odds of in-hospital death over four-fold (OR 4.48, 95% CI 3.02 to 6.165). Comorbid COVID-19 was also associated with lower odds of a favorable discharge (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.61). In the sensitivity analysis, comparing AIS patients with COVID-19 who did not undergo EVT (n=2139) to the AIS EVT patients with COVID-19, there was no difference in the rate of in-hospital death (30.6% vs 29.8%, P=0.868), and AIS EVT patients had a higher rate of favorable discharge (32.4% vs 47.1%, P=0.002). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:In AIS patients treated with EVT, comorbid COVID-19 infection was associated with in-hospital death and a lower odds of favorable discharge compared with patients without COVID-19, but not compared with AIS patients with COVID-19 who did not undergo EVT. AIS EVT patients with COVID-19 were younger, more likely to be male, have systemic complications, and almost twice as likely to be black and over three times as likely to be Hispanic.

BACKGROUND:Despite innovations in left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) technology, stroke remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in this population. Major clinical trials of LVAD have used various definitions and approaches to measuring stroke outcomes which may limit comparison of stroke risk between different devices. METHODS:Data from the five major LVAD randomized, controlled, trials was abstracted to compare definitions of stroke (composite, ischemic, hemorrhagic and disabling) and stroke event rates across trials. Methodological limitations and suggestions to improve research and clinical practices for stroke and LVAD were identified. RESULTS:Comparison of stroke events across LVAD clinical trials is confounded by methodological variability including heterogeneity in stroke definitions, non-standardized evaluation of stroke etiology, oversimplification of stroke severity classification, and inconsistent event rate reporting due to data censoring at the time of death or transplant. Variability in the study of stroke in LVAD patients limits the ability to compare devices and design prevention strategies to mitigate stroke risk. CONCLUSIONS:Based on this review, we propose that future clinical trials: 1) utilize standardized stroke definitions and define stroke subtypes, 2) ensure that neurologists are integrated in study design and event adjudication, 3) include more thorough evaluations of stroke etiology using multimodality techniques, and 4) adopt the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale to define stroke severity.

Background: Zinc impairs replication of RNA viruses such as SARS-CoV-1, and may be effective against SARS-CoV-2. However, to achieve adequate intracellular zinc levels, administration with an ionophore, which increases intracellular zinc levels, may be necessary. We evaluated the impact of zinc with an ionophore (Zn+ionophore) on COVID-19 in-hospital mortality rates. Methods: A multicenter cohort study was conducted of 3,473 adult hospitalized patients with reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR) positive SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted to four New York City hospitals between March 10 through May 20, 2020. Exclusion criteria were: death or discharge within 24h, comfort-care status, clinical trial enrollment, treatment with an IL-6 inhibitor or remdesivir. Patients who received Zn+ionophore were compared to patients who did not using multivariable time-dependent cox proportional hazards models for time to in-hospital death adjusting for confounders including age, sex, race, BMI, diabetes, week of admission, hospital location, sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score, intubation, acute renal failure, neurological events, treatment with corticosteroids, azithromycin or lopinavir/ritonavir and the propensity score of receiving Zn+ionophore. A sensitivity analysis was performed using a propensity score-matched cohort of patients who did or did not receive Zn+ionophore matched by age, sex and ventilator status. Results: Among 3,473 patients (median age 64, 1947 [56%] male, 522 [15%] ventilated, 545[16%] died), 1,006 (29%) received Zn+ionophore. Zn+ionophore was associated with a 24% reduced risk of in-hospital mortality (12% of those who received Zn+ionophore died versus 17% who did not; adjusted Hazard Ratio [aHR] 0.76, 95% CI 0.60-0.96, P=0.023). More patients who received Zn+ionophore were discharged home (72% Zn+ionophore vs 67% no Zn+ionophore, P=0.003) Neither Zn nor the ionophore alone were associated with decreased mortality rates. Propensity score-matched sensitivity analysis (N=1356) validated these results (Zn+ionophore aHR for mortality 0.63, 95%CI 0.44-0.91, P=0.015). There were no significant interactions for Zn+ionophore with other COVID-19 specific medications. Conclusions: Zinc with an ionophore was associated with increased rates of discharge home and a 24% reduced risk of in-hospital mortality among COVID-19 patients, while neither zinc alone nor the ionophore alone reduced mortality. Further randomized trials are warranted.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE/OBJECTIVE:Desmopressin (DDAVP) has been suggested for antiplatelet medication reversal in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) but there are limited data describing its effect on clinical outcomes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of DDAVP on hematoma expansion and thrombosis in patients with TBI who were prescribed pre-injury antiplatelet medications. METHODS:Consecutive adult patients who were admitted to our level I trauma center and prescribed pre-injury antiplatelet medications between July, 2012, and May, 2018, were retrospectively identified. Patients were excluded if their hospital length of stay was < 24 h, if DDAVP was administered by any route other than intravenous, if they received a DDAVP dose < 0.3 mcg/kg or there was no evidence of brain hemorrhage on computed tomography (CT) scan. Patients were stratified based on the use of DDAVP, and the incidence of hematoma expansion was compared between groups. Thrombotic events were reviewed as a secondary outcome. Multivariate analysis was utilized to control for confounding variables. RESULTS:Of 202 patients included in analysis, 158 (78%) received DDAVP. The mean age was 76 ± 12 years; the most common injury mechanism was falls (76%); 69% had acute subdural hematoma, and 49% had multi-compartmental hemorrhage. Initial Glasgow coma score was between 13 and 15 for 91% of patients. Aspirin was the most common antiplatelet regimen prescribed (N = 151, 75%), followed by dual antiplatelet regimens (N = 26, 13%) and adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-receptor inhibitors (N = 25, 12%). The incidence of hematoma expansion was 14% and 30% for patients who did and did not receive DDAVP, respectively (p = 0.015). After controlling for age, injury severity score, multi-compartmental hemorrhage, and receipt of pre-injury high-dose aspirin (> 81 mg), ADP-receptor inhibitors, oral anticoagulants, prothrombin complex concentrates or platelets in a multivariate analysis, the association between DDAVP and hematoma expansion remained significant (adjusted OR 0.259 [95% CI 0.103-0.646], p = 0.004). Thrombotic events were similar between the two groups (DDAVP, 2.5%, no DDAVP, 4.5%; p = 0.613). CONCLUSIONS:DDAVP was associated with a lower incidence of hematoma expansion in patients with mild TBI who were prescribed pre-injury antiplatelet medications. These results justify a randomized controlled trial to further evaluate the role of DDAVP for this indication.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused unprecedented demand and burden on emergency health care services in New York City. We aim to describe our experience providing acute stroke care at a comprehensive stroke center (CSC) and the impact of the pandemic on the quality of care for patients presenting with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). METHODS:We retrospectively analyzed data from a quality improvement registry of consecutive AIS patients at New York University Langone Health's CSC between 06/01/2019-05/15/2020. During the early stages of the pandemic, the acute stroke process was modified to incorporate COVID-19 screening, testing, and other precautionary measures. We compared stroke quality metrics including treatment times and discharge outcomes of AIS patients during the pandemic (03/012020-05/152020) compared with a historical pre-pandemic group (6/1/2019-2/29/2020). RESULTS:A total of 754 patients (pandemic-120; pre-pandemic-634) were admitted with a principal diagnosis of AIS; 198 (26.3%) received alteplase and/or mechanical thrombectomy. Despite longer median door to head CT times (16 vs 12 minutes; p = 0.05) and a trend towards longer door to groin puncture times (79.5 vs. 71 min, p = 0.06), the time to alteplase administration (36 vs 35 min; p = 0.83), door to reperfusion times (103 vs 97 min, p = 0.18) and defect-free care (95.2% vs 94.7%; p = 0.84) were similar in the pandemic and pre-pandemic groups. Successful recanalization rates (TICI≥2b) were also similar (82.6% vs. 86.7%, p = 0.48). After adjusting for stroke severity, age and a prior history of transient ischemic attack/stroke, pandemic patients had increased discharge mortality (adjusted OR 2.90 95% CI 1.77 - 7.17, p = 0.021) CONCLUSION: Despite unprecedented demands on emergency healthcare services, early multidisciplinary efforts to adapt the acute stroke treatment process resulted in keeping the stroke quality time metrics close to pre-pandemic levels. Future studies will be needed with a larger cohort comparing discharge and long-term outcomes between pre-pandemic and pandemic AIS patients.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Mechanical thrombectomy (MT) has helped many patients achieve functional independence. The effect of time-to-treatment based in specific epochs and as related to Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) has not been established. The goal of the study was to evaluate the association between last known normal (LKN)-to-puncture time and good functional outcome. METHODS:We conducted a retrospective cohort study of prospectively collected acute ischemic stroke patients undergoing MT for large vessel occlusion. We used binary logistic regression models adjusted for age, Modified Treatment in Cerebral Ischemia score, initial National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, and noncontrast CT ASPECTS to assess the association between LKN-to-puncture time and favorable outcome defined as Modified Rankin Score 0-2 on discharge. RESULTS:Among 421 patients, 328 were included in analysis. Increased LKN-to-puncture time was associated with decreased probability of good functional outcome (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] ratio per 15-minute delay = .98; 95% confidence interval [CI], .97-.99; P = .001). This was especially true when LKN-puncture time was 0-6 hours (aOR per 15-minute delay = .94; 95% CI, .89-.99; P = .05) or ASPECTS 8-10 (aOR = .98; 95% CI, .97-.99; P = .002) as opposed to when LKN-puncture time was 6-24 hours (aOR per 15-minute delay = .99; 95% CI, .97-1.00; P = .16) and ASPECTS <8 (aOR = .98; 95% CI, .93-1.03; P = .37). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Decreased LKN-groin puncture time improves outcome particularly in those with good ASPECTS presenting within 6 hours. Strategies to decrease reperfusion times should be investigated, particularly in those in the early time window and with good ASPECTS.

The COVID-19 pandemic dramatically affected the operations of New York City hospitals during March and April of 2020. This article describes the transformation of a neurology division at a 450-bed tertiary care hospital in a multi-ethnic community in Brooklyn during this initial wave of COVID-19. In lieu of a mass redeployment of staff to internal medicine teams, we report a novel method for a neurology division to participate in a hospital's expansion of care for patients with COVID-19 while maintaining existing team structures and their inherent supervisory and interpersonal support mechanisms.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:The coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic has led to challenges in provision of care, clinical assessment and communication with families. The unique considerations associated with evaluation of catastrophic brain injury and death by neurologic criteria in patients with Covid-19 infection have not been examined. METHODS:We describe the evaluation of six patients hospitalized at a health network in New York City in April 2020 who had Covid-19, were comatose and had absent brainstem reflexes. RESULTS:Four males and two females with a median age of 58.5 (IQR 47-68) were evaluated for catastrophic brain injury due to stroke and/or global anoxic injury at a median of 14 days (IQR 13-18) after admission for acute respiratory failure due to Covid-19. All patients had hypotension requiring vasopressors and had been treated with sedative/narcotic drips for ventilator dyssynchrony. Among these patients, 5 had received paralytics. Apnea testing was performed for 1 patient due to the decision to withdraw treatment (n = 2), concern for inability to tolerate testing (n = 2) and observation of spontaneous respirations (n = 1). The apnea test was aborted due to hypoxia and hypotension. After ancillary testing, death was declared in three patients based on neurologic criteria and in three patients based on cardiopulmonary criteria (after withdrawal of support (n = 2) or cardiopulmonary arrest (n = 1)). A family member was able to visit 5/6 patients prior to cardiopulmonary arrest/discontinuation of organ support. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:It is feasible to evaluate patients with catastrophic brain injury and declare brain death despite the Covid-19 pandemic, but this requires unique considerations.